At times in Christian thought, the priorities of pure doctrine and passionate mission have been perceived as opposites on a spectrum where emphasis on one results in neglect of the other, but without one, the other is deficient and doomed to crumble. Mission without doctrine is like a body without a skeleton, but apart from mission, doctrine is like dry bones in a museum. A Lutheran Reformission maintains a dual emphasis, resulting in doctrinal missions as well as missional doctrine.

Monday, November 25, 2013

My article from this week's newspapers about duties and expectations of a pastor's wife:

Q: What does the Bible have to say
about the role of the pastor’s wife in the congregation? Are there additional expectations of her, or
special privileges in comparison to other members?

If an individual with no experience
in a church were asked to observe the life of several congregations, they would
probably report that, when their pastor is married, the pastor’s wife is
treated differently, to some degree, than other members of the
congregation.

In traditions with celibate clergy,
this is obviously not a question, and in traditions which have instituted
female clergy, the social dynamics have been reported to be different for clergy
husbands, but in the majority of traditions where married, male clergy are the
norm, the pastor’s wife finds herself facing a unique set of expectations not
placed upon others.

Many African-American Protestant
congregations even refer to the pastor’s wife as the “first lady” of the congregation,
with a role in the congregation that resembles the role of the President’s wife
has in our nation.

It has been a typical expectation in
the recent history of American Christianity, that the pastor’s wife be able to
play the organ, that she would teach Sunday School, participate heavily in (or
frequently to lead) the ladies aid or other women’s organizations in the
congregation, and possibly lead a youth group serve (without pay) as church
secretary, or direct Christmas programs for good measure.

In addition to all of this, she was
expected to manage her household, largely without the assistance of her husband
(who was too busy with congregational business to help at home), ensure
perfectly angelic behavior from her children (both in and outside of church),
and be prepared at all times to host guests at a moment’s notice in her
perfectly-kept home. And if her husband
was found in any vice, such as an affair or alcohol abuse, local gossip would
likely find fault with her for “driving him to it.”

Wives who found themselves living in
a parsonage (church-owned home for the pastor’s family) often faced even more
challenging circumstances, as not only were their lives (with accompanying mistakes
and imperfections) more easily observed by the congregation, with little
privacy (what some authors have called “life in the fishbowl”), but often they
were held to impossibly high standards for their care and keeping of the “congregation’s
house.”

Even when these expectations are not
as severe as they once were, many of them still carry on today, but what does
the Bible have to say about the role of the pastor’s wife? Nearly nothing.

While it does seem that many of the
Apostles were married, (1 Corinthians 9 mentions the apostles’ wives, and the
Gospel of Luke mentions Peter’s mother-in-law) I cannot recall any instance
where the wives actions are described or that their names are even mentioned. Likewise, the roles of Barnabus, Titus and
Timothy’s wives and the rest of the second generation of pastors are also not
described within the Bible.

The closest the Bible comes to
describing the expectations of a pastor’s wife is when Paul writes to Timothy
and Titus that the pastor must have only one wife, and that he must have his
family and children in order—but these are more about the pastor than his
wife.

Biblically, there is no such office in
the church as pastor’s wife. The pastor
is called to publicly proclaim God’s Word to his congregation, and the
administer God’s Sacraments there—that is his office, and does not extend to
her. His wife finds herself not in the
role of co-pastor, unofficial secretary, or full-time church volunteer, but
instead that of wife, mother, neighbor, Christian woman, or whatever earthly
vocation she has chosen to undertake. Her
she is called, first of all, to carry these out well.

She may then do some of the things
previously mentioned, but not because she is the pastor’s wife, but because she
is a Christian and serves in the congregation just like the other members. In other circumstances, her greatest
contribution might not be what she is expected to do in public, but to care for
her home and children and thus support her husband’s ability to be about the
work of ministry on behalf of the congregation.
All are equally beneficial to the body of Christ, one is not more noble
than the others, and she is free to do whatever seems most wise in her judgment
for the circumstances in which she and her family live.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Q: Are there some sins that God
considers more offensive or worthy of punishment than others?

The endeavor of classifying or
comparing sins is one that takes on different nuances depending on the context
in which the question is asked.

The most straightforward example of
this would be the context of salvation.
In this context, both the quality and the quantity of the sin are
irrelevant. The Epistle of James reveals
this concisely when it states that “Whoever keeps the whole law, yet sins at
just one point, is guilty of breaking all of it.” If one proposes to earn salvation by means of
obeying the law, the standard of perfection.
The presence of any sin, great or small, means failure. In this sense, one sin is the same as the
next, whether mass murder or shoplifting, and all incur the same consequence.

In contrast to this, it has been
proposed by some that there are two types of sin—mortal sins which lead to
condemnation and venial sins which, while still morally wrong, do not
necessarily condemn. However, the type
of sin is not what condemns, but rather the un-forgiven status of the sinner
who commits it. Mortal sins really are
those committed, no matter how small, apart from Christ’s forgiveness. Venial sins are really those committed, no
matter how large, that are covered by Christ’s forgiveness.

The fact that all sin does not cease
to be true for those who become Christians.
The Bible does not tell a story of sinners and righteous people, but
rather the story of one righteous man, Jesus, and a world of sinners—some
forgiven and some un-forgiven. The
difference between Christians and non-Christians is not portrayed by the Bible
as whether they sin or not, but as how that sin is to be handled. For one who trusts in himself, in nothing at
all, or in some other entity than Jesus, he bears the burden of repaying his
sins himself, and even the smallest sin condemns. On the other hand, for one who trusts in
Jesus as his substitute in living a God-pleasing life and in suffering sin’s
punishment, no sin can condemn.

Similarly, there is the case of
willful or unrepentant sin—these are sins done with the knowledge that they are
wrong, but disregarding concern for the fact that they are. This is the sort of sin would cause great concern
that the one who commits it is apart from Christ. On the other hand, there are those that might
be known as sins of weakness or crimes of passion. These are committed without contemplation of
or with inadequate appreciation for their sinfulness, and might only be
realized as wrong after the fact. These
might be committed by the Christian and non-Christian alike, and would include
such things as an assault or murder that occurs in a flash of anger or the
suicide committed in the dark depths of depression or despair. While such actions certainly remain sins
before God, they would not necessarily indicate to a pastoral care provider
that the one who commits them has been denied forgiveness or separated from
Christ.

In another context, there is a
distinction between a sin’s implications before God versus before man. Before God, all sins are equally condemning,
as previously described, while at the same time, those sins have varying
degrees of impact here on earth. These
consequences before man are significantly different in that some sins merely
cause offense to those who are sinned against, while others create a
devastating ripple effect that causes immeasurable harm to those sinned
against. This is why society responds
more harshly to sins like child molestation and premeditated murder than to
gossip or lust and why habitual criminals are more strongly punished than
first-time offenders.

The important realization to be
emphasized regarding sin is that all sin must be accounted for, either by the
sinner himself, or by Jesus, and that the important factor is not the quantity
or quality of the sin, but rather that it be forgiven by Jesus and the sinner
reconciled to God through Him.

Lutheranism is more than a cultural identity or a denominational label. In fact, this cultural and institutional baggage may be the primary obstacle in Lutheranism’s path.

To be a Lutheran is not dependent on a code of behavior or a set of common customs. Instead, to be a Lutheran is to receive Jesus in His Word, Body, and Blood for the forgiveness of sins in the Divine Service; and to be bearers of this pure Truth to a broken world corrupted with sin, death, and every lie of the devil and man’s own sinful heart.

While the false and misleading ideas of human religious invention are appealing to sin-blinded minds, they fail when exposed to the realities of life. It is tragic when souls are led to confusion and despair because of the false religious ideas with which they are surrounded. The Biblical doctrine taught by the Apostles and restored at the Reformation holds answers which are relevant regardless of time or place and offers assurance of forgiven sins and eternal life who all who believe its message.

I am a husband, a father, the pastor of St. John’s Lutheran Church (LCMS) in Burt, IA, and track chaplain at Algona Raceway.